Adult Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma Treatment–for health professionals (PDQ®)

General Information About Adult Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma (NHL)

The NHLs are a heterogeneous group of lymphoproliferative malignancies with differing patterns of behavior and responses to treatment.[1]

Like Hodgkin lymphoma, NHL usually originates in lymphoid tissues and can spread to other organs. NHL, however, is much less predictable than Hodgkin lymphoma and has a far greater predilection to disseminate to extranodal sites. The prognosis depends on the histologic type, stage, and treatment.

Incidence and Mortality

Estimated new cases and deaths from NHL in the United States in 2015:[2]

Anatomy

Prognosis and Survival

The NHLs can be divided into two prognostic groups: the indolent lymphomas and the aggressive lymphomas.

Indolent NHL types have a relatively good prognosis with a median survival as long as 20 years, but they usually are not curable in advanced clinical stages.[3] Early-stage (stage I and stage II) indolent NHL can be effectively treated with radiation therapy alone. Most of the indolent types are nodular (or follicular) in morphology.

The aggressive type of NHL has a shorter natural history, but a significant number of these patients can be cured with intensive combination chemotherapy regimens.

In general, with modern treatment of patients with NHL, overall survival at 5 years is over 60%. Of patients with aggressive NHL, more than 50% can be cured. The vast majority of relapses occur in the first 2 years after therapy. The risk of late relapse is higher in patients who manifest both indolent and aggressive histologies.[4]

While indolent NHL is responsive to immunotherapy, radiation therapy, and chemotherapy, a continuous rate of relapse is usually seen in advanced stages. Patients, however, can often be re-treated with considerable success as long as the disease histology remains low grade. Patients who present with or convert to aggressive forms of NHL may have sustained complete remissions with combination chemotherapy regimens or aggressive consolidation with marrow or stem cell support.[5,6]

Related Summaries

Other PDQ summaries containing information related to non-Hodgkin lymphoma treatment include the following:

Late Effects of Treatment for Adult NHL

Late effects of treatment for non-Hodgkin lymphoma
(NHL) have been observed. Pelvic radiation therapy and large cumulative doses of cyclophosphamide have been associated with a high risk of permanent sterility.[1] For as many as three decades after diagnosis, patients are at a significantly elevated risk for second primary cancers, especially the following:[1-3]

Lung cancer.

Brain cancer.

Kidney cancer.

Bladder cancer.

Melanoma.

Hodgkin lymphoma.

Acute nonlymphocytic leukemia.

Left ventricular dysfunction was a significant late effect in long-term survivors of high-grade NHL who received more than 200 mg/m² of doxorubicin.[4,5]

Myelodysplastic syndrome and acute myelogenous leukemia are late complications of myeloablative therapy with autologous bone marrow or peripheral blood stem cell support, as well as conventional chemotherapy-containing alkylating agents.[1,6-13] Most of these patients show clonal hematopoiesis even before the transplantation, suggesting that the hematologic injury usually occurs during induction or reinduction chemotherapy.[8,14,15] With a median 10-year follow-up after autologous bone marrow transplantation (BMT) with conditioning using cyclophosphamide and total-body radiation therapy, in a series of 605 patients, the incidence of a second malignancy was 21%, and 10% of those were solid tumors.[16]

Successful pregnancies with children born free of congenital abnormalities have been reported in young women after autologous BMT.[17]

Some patients have osteopenia or osteoporosis at the start of therapy; bone density may worsen after therapy for lymphoma.[18]

Cellular Classification of Adult NHL

A pathologist should be consulted prior to a biopsy because some studies require special preparation of tissue (e.g., frozen tissue). Knowledge of cell surface markers and immunoglobulin and T-cell receptor gene rearrangements may help with diagnostic and therapeutic decisions. The clonal excess of light-chain immunoglobulin may differentiate malignant from reactive cells. Since the prognosis and the approach to treatment are influenced by histopathology, outside biopsy specimens should be carefully reviewed by a hematopathologist who is experienced in diagnosing lymphomas. Although lymph node biopsies are recommended whenever possible, sometimes immunophenotypic data are sufficient to allow diagnosis of lymphoma when fine-needle aspiration cytology is preferred.[1,2]

Historical Classification Systems

Historically, uniform treatment of patients with non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) has been hampered by the lack of a uniform classification system. In 1982, results of a consensus study were published as the Working Formulation.[3] The Working Formulation combined results from six major classification systems into one classification. This allowed comparison of studies from different institutions and countries. The Rappaport classification, which also follows, is no longer in common use.

Current Classification Systems

As the understanding of NHL has improved and as the histopathologic diagnosis of NHL has become more sophisticated with the use of immunologic and genetic techniques, a number of new pathologic entities have been described.[4] In addition, the understanding and treatment of many of the previously described pathologic subtypes have changed. As a result, the Working Formulation has become outdated and less useful to clinicians and pathologists. Thus, European and American pathologists have proposed a new classification, the Revised European American Lymphoma (REAL) classification.[5-8] Since 1995, members of the European and American Hematopathology societies have been collaborating on a new World Health Organization (WHO) classification, which represents an updated version of the REAL system.[9,10]

The WHO modification of the REAL classification recognizes three major categories
of lymphoid malignancies based on morphology and cell lineage: B-cell
neoplasms, T-cell/natural killer (NK)-cell neoplasms, and Hodgkin lymphoma (HL).
Both lymphomas and lymphoid leukemias are included in this classification
because both solid and circulating phases are present in many lymphoid
neoplasms and distinction between them is artificial. For example, B-cell
chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) and B-cell small lymphocytic lymphoma are simply
different manifestations of the same neoplasm, as are lymphoblastic lymphomas
and acute lymphocytic leukemias. Within the B-cell and T-cell categories, two
subdivisions are recognized: precursor neoplasms, which correspond to the
earliest stages of differentiation, and more mature differentiated
neoplasms.[9,10]

Pittaluga S, Bijnens L, Teodorovic I, et al.: Clinical analysis of 670 cases in two trials of the European Organization for the Research and Treatment of Cancer Lymphoma Cooperative Group subtyped according to the Revised European-American Classification of Lymphoid Neoplasms: a comparison with the Working Formulation. Blood 87 (10): 4358-67, 1996. [PUBMED Abstract]

Follicular Lymphoma

Follicular lymphoma comprises 20% of all NHLs and as many as 70% of the indolent lymphomas reported in American and European clinical trials.[1-3] Most patients with follicular lymphoma are age 50 years and older and present with widespread disease at diagnosis. Nodal involvement is most common and is often accompanied by splenic and bone marrow disease. Rearrangement of the bcl-2 gene is present in more than 90% of patients with follicular lymphoma; overexpression of the bcl-2 protein is associated with the inability to eradicate the lymphoma by inhibiting apoptosis.[4]

Prognosis

Despite the advanced stage, the median survival ranges from 8 to 15 years, leading to the designation of being indolent.[5-7] Patients with advanced-stage follicular lymphoma are not cured with current therapeutic options.[8] The rate of relapse is fairly consistent over time, even in patients who have achieved complete responses to treatment.[9] Watchful waiting, i.e., the deferring of treatment until the patient becomes symptomatic, is an option for patients with advanced-stage follicular lymphoma.[10] An international index for follicular lymphoma (i.e., the Follicular Lymphoma International Prognostic Index [FLIPI]) [11-13] identified five significant risk factors prognostic of overall survival (OS):

Age (≤60 years vs. >60 years).

Serum lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) (normal vs. elevated).

Stage (stage I or stage II vs. stage III or stage IV).

Hemoglobin level (≥120 g/L vs. <120 g/L).

Number of nodal areas (≤4 vs. >4).

Patients with none or one risk factor have an 85% 10-year survival rate, while three or more risk factors confer a 40% 10-year survival rate.[11] As a revised FLIPI, an elevated beta-2-microglobulin and lymph node size of more than 6 cm are proposed prognostic factors instead of serum LDH and the number of nodal areas.[14] Gene expression profiles of tumor biopsy specimens suggest that follicular lymphoma that is surrounded by infiltrating T-lymphocytes has a much longer median survival (13.6 years) than follicular lymphoma that is surrounded by dendritic and monocytic cells (3.9 years) (P < .001).[15]

Follicular, small-cleaved cell lymphoma and follicular mixed small-cleaved and large cell lymphoma do not have reproducibly different disease-free survival or OS.

Therapeutic approaches

Therapeutic options include watchful waiting; rituximab, an anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody, alone or with purine nucleoside analogs; oral alkylating agents; and combination chemotherapy.[16] Radiolabeled monoclonal antibodies, vaccines, and autologous or allogeneic bone marrow or peripheral stem cell transplantation are also under clinical evaluation.[16,17] Currently, no randomized trials have mature results to guide clinicians about the initial choice of rituximab, nucleoside analogs, alkylating agents, combination chemotherapy, radiolabeled monoclonal antibodies, or combinations of these options. On a comparative basis, it is difficult to prove benefit when relapsing disease is followed with watchful waiting, or when the median survival is more than 10 years. Follicular lymphoma in situ and primary follicular lymphoma of the duodenum are particularly indolent variants that rarely progress and rarely require therapy.[18,19] A so-called pediatric-type nodal follicular lymphoma has indolent behavior and rarely recurs; adult patients with this histologic variant are characterized by a lack of bcl-2 rearrangement in conjunction with a Ki-67 proliferation index greater than 30% and a localized stage I presentation.[20]

Patients with indolent lymphoma may experience a relapse with a more aggressive histology. If the clinical pattern of relapse suggests that the disease is behaving in a more aggressive manner, a biopsy should be performed. Documentation of conversion to a more aggressive histology requires an appropriate change to a therapy applicable to that histologic type.[21] Rapid growth or discordant growth between various disease sites may indicate a histologic conversion. The risk of histologic transformation was 30% by 10 years in a retrospective review of 325 patients from diagnosis between 1972 and 1999.[22] In this series, high-risk factors for subsequent histologic transformation were advanced stage, high-risk FLIPI, and expectant management. The 5-year OS rate was more than 50% for 172 patients who had biopsy-proven, aggressive-histology transformation in a multicenter cohort study employing rituximab plus anthracycline or platinum-based chemotherapy, or similar therapy followed by autologous or allogeneic stem cell transplantation (ASCT).[23,24]

Lymphoplasmacytic Lymphoma (Waldenström Macroglobulinemia)

Lymphoplasmacytic lymphoma is usually associated with a monoclonal serum paraprotein of immunoglobulin M (IgM) type (Waldenström macroglobulinemia).[25-27] Most patients have bone marrow, lymph node, and splenic involvement, and some patients may develop hyperviscosity syndrome. Other lymphomas may also be associated with serum paraproteins.

Asymptomatic patients can be monitored for evidence of disease progression without immediate need for chemotherapy.[10,28,29]

Prognostic factors associated with symptoms requiring therapy include the following:

Therapeutic approaches

The management of lymphoplasmacytic lymphoma is similar to that of other low-grade lymphomas, especially diffuse, small lymphocytic lymphoma/chronic lymphocytic leukemia.[26-28,30-32] If the viscosity relative to water is greater than four, the patient may have manifestations of hyperviscosity. Plasmapheresis is useful for temporary, acute symptoms (such as retinopathy, congestive heart failure, and central nervous system dysfunction) but should be combined with chemotherapy for prolonged control of the disease. Symptomatic patients with a serum viscosity of not more than four are usually started directly on chemotherapy. Therapy may be required to correct hemolytic anemia in patients with chronic cold agglutinin disease; rituximab, cyclophosphamide, and steroids are often employed.[29] Occasionally, a heated room is required for patients whose cold agglutinins become activated by even minor chilling.

First-line regimens include rituximab, the nucleoside analogs, and alkylating agents, either as single agents or as part of combination chemotherapy.[33-36] Rituximab shows 60% to 80% response rates in previously untreated patients, but close monitoring of the serum IgM is required because of a sudden rise in this paraprotein at the start of therapy.[33,37,38][Level of evidence: 3iiiDiv] The rise of IgM after rituximab can be avoided with the concomitant use of an alkylating agent such as cyclophosphamide or the proteosome inhibitor bortezomib.[29,39] The nucleoside analogs 2-chlorodeoxyadenosine and fludarabine have shown similar response rates for previously untreated patients with lymphoplasmacytic lymphoma.[36,40,41][Level of evidence: 3iiiDiv] Single-agent alkylators, bendamustine, bortezomib, and combination chemotherapy with or without rituximab also show similar response rates.[36,39,42-45][Level of evidence: 3iiiDiv] Currently, no randomized trials guide clinicians about the initial choice of rituximab, nucleoside analogs, alkylating agents, combination chemotherapy, or combinations of these options.[26,27,33] A combination of bortezomib, dexamethasone, and rituximab has been proposed for its high response rate, rapidity of action, and avoidance of an IgM rebound.[46-48]

Interferon-alpha also shows activity in this disease, in contrast to poor responses in patients with multiple myeloma.[49] Myeloablative therapy with autologous or allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell support is under clinical evaluation.[50-53] Candidates for this approach should avoid long-term use of alkylating agents or purine nucleoside analogs, which can deplete hematopoietic stem cells or predispose patients to myelodysplasia or acute leukemia.[33,54] After relapse from alkylating-agent therapy, 92 patients with lymphoplasmacytic lymphoma were randomly assigned to either fludarabine or cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, and prednisone. Although relapse-free survival favored fludarabine (median duration of 19 months vs. 3 months, P < .01), no difference was observed in OS.[55][Level of
evidence: 1iiDii] Among patients with concomitant hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection, some will attain a complete or partial remission after loss of detectable HCV RNA with treatment using interferon-alpha with or without ribavirin.[56][Level of evidence: 3iiiDiv]

Marginal Zone Lymphoma

Marginal zone lymphomas were previously included among the diffuse, small lymphocytic lymphomas. When marginal zone lymphomas involve the nodes, they are called monocytoid B-cell lymphomas or nodal marginal zone B-cell lymphomas, and when they involve extranodal sites (e.g., gastrointestinal tract, thyroid, lung, breast, orbit, and skin), they are called mucosa-associated lymphatic tissue (MALT) lymphomas.[57-65]

Gastric MALT

Many patients have a history of autoimmune disease, such as Hashimoto thyroiditis or Sjögren syndrome, or of Helicobacter gastritis. Most patients present with stage I or stage II extranodal disease, which is most often in the stomach. Treatment of Helicobacter pylori infection may resolve most cases of localized gastric involvement.[66,67] After standard antibiotic regimens, 50% of patients show resolution of gastric MALT by endoscopy after 3 months. Other patients may show resolution after 12 to 18 months of observation. Of the patients who attain complete remission, 30% demonstrate monoclonality by immunoglobulin heavy chain rearrangement on stomach biopsies with a 5-year median follow-up.[68] The clinical implication of this finding is unknown. Translocation t(11;18) in patients with gastric MALT predicts for poor response to antibiotic therapy, for H. pylori–negative testing, and for poor response to oral alkylator chemotherapy.[69-71] Stable asymptomatic patients with persistently positive biopsies have been successfully followed on a watchful waiting approach until disease progression.[67] Patients who progress are treated with radiation therapy,[72-75] rituximab,[76] surgery (total gastrectomy or partial gastrectomy plus radiation therapy),[77] chemotherapy,[63] or combined–modality therapy.[78] The use of endoscopic ultrasonography may help clinicians to follow responses in these patients.[79] Four case series (encompassing more than 100 patients with stage IE or IIE diffuse, large, B-cell lymphoma with or without associated MALT (but H. pylori-positive) reported durable complete remissions in more than 50% of the patients after treatment of H. pylori.[80-83]

Extragastric MALT

Localized involvement of other sites can be treated with radiation or surgery.[73-75,84-86] Patients with extragastric MALT lymphoma have a higher relapse rate than patients with gastric MALT lymphoma in some series, with relapses many years and even decades later.[87] Many of these recurrences involve different MALT sites than the original location.[88] When disseminated to lymph nodes, bone marrow, or blood, this entity behaves like other low-grade lymphomas.[64,89] A prospective, randomized trial of 252 patients with nongastric, extranodal MALT compared chlorambucil with rituximab plus chlorambucil.[90] With a median follow-up of 62 months, the event-free survival was better for the rituximab arm (68% vs. 50%, P = .002), however, the 5-year OS was 89% in both arms.[90][Level of evidence: 1iiDi] This trial was extended with a third arm using rituximab alone, the results of which are not yet available. For patients with ocular adnexal MALT, antibiotic therapy using doxycycline that targeted Chlamydia psittaci resulted in durable remissions for almost half of the patients in a review of the literature that included 131 patients.[91][Level of evidence: 3iiiDiv] Large B-cell lymphomas of MALT sites are classified and treated as diffuse large cell lymphomas.[92]

Monocytoid B cell lymphoma (Nodal marginal zone lymphoma)

Patients with nodal marginal zone lymphoma (monocytoid B-cell lymphoma) are treated with the same paradigm of watchful waiting or therapies as described for follicular lymphoma. Among patients with concomitant HCV infection, the majority attain a complete or partial remission after loss of detectable HCV RNA with treatment using interferon-alpha with or without ribavirin.[56][Level of evidence: 3iiiDiv]

Mediterranean abdominal lymphoma

The disease variously known as Mediterranean abdominal lymphoma, heavy–chain disease, or immunoproliferative small intestinal disease (IPSID), which occurs in young adults in eastern Mediterranean countries, is another version of MALT lymphoma, which responds to antibiotics in its early stages.[93] Campylobacter jejuni has been identified as one of the bacterial species associated with IPSID, and antibiotic therapy may result in remission of the disease.[94]

Splenic marginal zone lymphoma

Splenic marginal zone lymphoma is an indolent lymphoma that is marked by massive splenomegaly and peripheral blood and bone marrow involvement, usually without adenopathy.[95-97] This type of lymphoma is otherwise known as splenic lymphoma with villous lymphocytes. Splenectomy may result in prolonged remission.[65,98]

Management is similar to that of other low-grade lymphomas and usually involves rituximab alone or rituximab in combination with purine analogs or alkylating agent chemotherapy.[99] Splenic marginal zone lymphoma responds less well to chemotherapy, which would ordinarily be effective for chronic lymphocytic leukemia.[96,97,99] Among small numbers of patients with splenic marginal zone lymphoma (splenic lymphoma with villous lymphocytes) and infection with HCV, the majority attained a complete or partial remission after loss of detectable HCV RNA with treatment using interferon-alpha with or without ribavirin.[56,100]; [101][Level of evidence: 3iiiDiv] In contrast, no responses to interferon were seen in six HCV-negative patients.

Primary Cutaneous Anaplastic Large Cell Lymphoma

Primary cutaneous anaplastic large cell lymphoma presents in the skin only with no pre-existing lymphoproliferative disease and no extracutaneous sites of involvement.[102-104] Patients with this type of lymphoma encompass a spectrum ranging from clinically benign lymphomatoid papulosis, marked by localized nodules that may regress spontaneously, to a progressive and systemic disease requiring aggressive doxorubicin-based combination chemotherapy. This spectrum has been called the primary cutaneous CD30-positive T-cell lymphoproliferative disorder.

Patients with localized disease usually undergo radiation therapy. With more disseminated involvement, watchful waiting or doxorubicin-based combination chemotherapy is applied.[102-104]

Diffuse Large B-cell Lymphoma

Diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) is the most common of the NHLs and comprises 30% of newly diagnosed cases.[1] Most patients present with rapidly enlarging masses, often with both local and systemic symptoms (designated B symptoms with fever, recurrent night sweats, or weight loss). (Refer to the PDQ summary on Hot Flashes and Night Sweats and the PDQ summary on Nutrition in Cancer Care for more information on weight loss.)

Some cases of large B-cell lymphoma have a prominent background of reactive T cells and often of histiocytes, so-called T-cell/histiocyte-rich large B-cell lymphoma. This subtype of large cell lymphoma has frequent liver, spleen, and bone marrow involvement; however, the outcome is equivalent to that of similarly staged patients with DLBCL.[2-4] Some patients with DLCBL at diagnosis have a concomitant indolent small B-cell component; while overall survival (OS) appears similar after multidrug chemotherapy, there is a higher risk of indolent relapse.[5]

Prognosis

The vast majority of patients with localized disease are curable with combined–modality therapy or combination chemotherapy alone.[6] For patients with advanced-stage disease, 50% of presenting patients are cured with doxorubicin-based combination chemotherapy and rituximab.[7-9]

An International Prognostic Index (IPI) for aggressive NHL (diffuse large cell lymphoma) identifies five significant risk factors prognostic of OS:[10]

Age (≤60 years vs. >60 years).

Serum lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) (normal vs. elevated).

Performance status (0 or 1 vs. 2–4).

Stage (stage I or stage II vs. stage III or stage IV).

Extranodal site involvement (0 or 1 vs. 2–4).

Patients with two or more risk factors have a less than 50% chance of relapse-free survival and OS at 5 years. This study also identifies patients at high risk of relapse based on specific sites of involvement, including bone marrow, central nervous system (CNS), liver, lung, and spleen. Age-adjusted and stage-adjusted modifications of this IPI are used for younger patients with localized disease.[11] The bcl-2 gene and rearrangement of the myc gene or dual overexpression of the myc gene, or both, confer a particularly poor prognosis.[12-15] Patients at high risk of relapse may be considered for clinical trials.[16] Molecular profiles of gene expression using DNA microarrays may help to stratify patients in the future for therapies directed at specific targets and to better predict survival after standard chemotherapy.[17-21] Patients who have DLBCL with coexpression of CD20 and CD30 may define a subgroup with a unique molecular signature, a more favorable prognosis, and possible therapeutic implication for the use of anti-CD30–specific therapy, such as brentuximab vedotin.[22] Patients with DLBCL who are event-free after 2 years have a subsequent OS equivalent to that of the age- and sex-matched general population.[23]

CNS prophylaxis

CNS prophylaxis (usually with four to six injections of methotrexate intrathecally) is recommended for patients with paranasal sinus or testicular involvement. Some clinicians are employing high-dose intravenous methotrexate (usually four doses) as an alternative to intrathecal therapy because drug delivery is improved and patient morbidity is decreased.[24] CNS prophylaxis for bone marrow involvement is controversial; some investigators recommend it, others do not.[25,26] A retrospective analysis of 605 patients with diffuse large cell lymphoma who did not receive prophylactic intrathecal therapy identified an elevated serum LDH and more than one extranodal site as independent risk factors for CNS recurrence. Patients with both risk factors have a 17% probability of CNS recurrence at 1 year after diagnosis (95% confidence interval [CI], 7%–28%) versus 2.8% (95% CI, 2.7%–2.9%) for the remaining patients.[27][Level of evidence: 3iiiDiii] The addition of rituximab to CHOP (cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, prednisone)-based regimens has significantly reduced the risk of CNS relapse in retrospective analyses.[28,29]

Primary Mediastinal Large B-cell Lymphoma

Primary mediastinal (thymic) large B-cell lymphoma is a subset of diffuse large cell lymphoma characterized by significant fibrosis on histology.[30-36] Patients are usually female and young (median age of 30–40 years). Patients present with a locally invasive anterior mediastinal mass that may cause respiratory symptoms or superior vena cava syndrome.

Prognosis and therapy is the same as for other comparably staged patients with DLCBL. Uncontrolled, phase II studies employing dose-adjusted EPOCH (etoposide, prednisone, vincristine, cyclophosphamide, and doxorubicin) plus rituximab or R-CHOP (rituximab, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone) show high cure rates while avoiding any mediastinal radiation.[37-40][Level of evidence: 3iiiA] These results suggest that patients who receive R-CHOP-based regimens may avoid the serious long-term complications of radiation therapy when given with chemotherapy. Posttreatment fluorine-18-fluorodeoxyglucose–positron-emission tomography–computed tomography (FDG-PET-CT) scans appear unreliable with many false positives.[37] According to an anecdotal prospective single-arm trial, describing a post-therapy–positive FDG-PET-CT as greater than liver uptake (rather than mediastinal blood-pool uptake) may identify patients with an increased risk of relapse.[41]The only randomized trial showing an OS advantage for combined modality therapy was retracted. (Refer to the Superior Vena Cava Syndrome section in the PDQ summary on Cardiopulmonary Syndromes for more information.)

Follicular Large Cell Lymphoma

Prognosis

The natural history of follicular large cell lymphoma remains controversial.[42] While there is agreement about the significant number of long-term disease-free survivors with early-stage disease, the curability of patients with advanced disease (stage III or stage IV) remains uncertain. Some groups report a continuous relapse rate similar to the other follicular lymphomas (a pattern of indolent lymphoma).[43] Other investigators report a plateau in freedom from progression at levels expected for an aggressive lymphoma (40% at 10 years).[44,45] This discrepancy may be caused by variations in histologic classification between institutions and the rarity of patients with follicular large cell lymphoma. A retrospective review of 252 patients, all treated with anthracycline-containing combination chemotherapy, showed that patients with more than 50% diffuse components on biopsy had a worse OS than other patients with follicular large cell lymphoma.[46]

Therapeutic approaches

Treatment of these patients is more similar to treatment of aggressive NHL than it is to the treatment of indolent NHL. In support of this approach, treatment with high-dose chemotherapy and autologous hematopoietic peripheral stem cell transplantation (SCT) shows the same curative potential in patients with follicular large cell lymphoma who relapse as it does in patients with diffuse large cell lymphoma who relapse.[47][Level of evidence: 3iiiA]

Anaplastic Large Cell Lymphoma

Anaplastic large cell lymphomas (ALCL) may be confused with carcinomas and are associated with the Ki-1 (CD30) antigen. These lymphomas are usually of T-cell origin, often present with extranodal disease, and are found especially in the skin.

The translocation of chromosomes 2 and 5 creates a unique fusion protein with a nucleophosmin-anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK).[48]

Patients whose lymphomas express ALK (immunohistochemistry) are usually younger and may have systemic symptoms, extranodal disease, and advanced-stage disease; however, they have a more favorable survival rate than that of ALK-negative patients.[49,50]

Patients with ALK-positive ALCL are generally treated the same as patients with diffuse large cell lymphomas using the CHOP regimen and have a prognosis that is as good as comparably staged patients.[50] For patients with relapsed disease, anecdotal responses have been reported for brentuximab vedotin (anti-tubulin agent attached to a CD30-specific monoclonal antibody),[51,52] romidepsin,[53] and pralatrexate.[54][Level of evidence: 3iiiDiv] For patients with relapsed disease, autologous stem cell transplantation showed a 50% 3-year progression-free survival (PFS) for 39 patients in a retrospective review.[55][Level of evidence: 3iiiDiii]

ALCL in children is usually characterized by systemic and cutaneous disease and has high response rates and good OS with doxorubicin-based combination chemotherapy.[56] Patients with breast implant–associated anaplastic large-cell lymphoma may do well without chemotherapy after capsulectomy and implant removal if the disease is confined to the fibrous capsule, and no associated mass is present.[57]

Extranodal NK-/T-cell Lymphoma

Extranodal natural killer (NK)-/T-cell lymphoma (nasal type) is an aggressive lymphoma marked by extensive necrosis and angioinvasion, most often presenting in extranodal sites, in particular the nasal or paranasal sinus region.[58-61] Other extranodal sites include the palate, trachea, skin, and gastrointestinal tract. Hemophagocytic syndrome may occur; historically, these tumors were considered part of lethal midline granuloma.[62] In most cases, Epstein-Barr virus (EBV) genomes are detectable in the tumor cells and immunophenotyping shows CD56 positivity. Cases with blood and marrow involvement are considered NK-cell leukemia.

The increased risk of CNS involvement and of local recurrence has led to recommendations for radiation therapy locally, concurrently, or before the start of chemotherapy, and for intrathecal prophylaxis and/or prophylactic cranial radiation therapy.[63-68] The highly aggressive course, with poor response and short survival with standard therapies, especially for patients with advanced-stage disease or extranasal presentation, has led some investigators to recommend autologous or allogenic peripheral SCT consolidation.[59-61,69,70] L-asparaginase-containing regimens have shown anecdotal response rates greater than 50% for relapsing, refractory, or newly diagnosed stage IV patients.[71,72] NK-/T-cell lymphoma that presents only in the skin has a more favorable prognosis, especially in patients with coexpression of CD30 with CD56.[73] A benign NK-cell enteropathy (EBV negative) on endoscopic biopsy should be distinguished from NK-/T-cell lymphoma.[74]

Lymphomatoid Granulomatosis

Lymphomatoid granulomatosis is an EBV-positive large B-cell lymphoma with a predominant T-cell background.[75,76] The histology shows association with angioinvasion and vasculitis, usually manifesting as pulmonary lesions or paranasal sinus involvement.

Patients are managed like others with diffuse large cell lymphoma and require doxorubicin-based combination chemotherapy.

Angioimmunoblastic T-cell Lymphoma

Angioimmunoblastic T-cell lymphoma (AITL) or (ATCL) was formerly called angioimmunoblastic lymphadenopathy with dysproteinemia. Characterized by clonal T-cell receptor gene rearrangement, this entity is managed like diffuse large cell lymphoma.[77-79] Patients present with profound lymphadenopathy, fever, night sweats, weight loss, skin rash, a positive Coombs test, and polyclonal hypergammaglobulinemia.[62] (Refer to the information on night sweats in the PDQ summary on Hot Flashes and Night Sweats, information on weight loss in the in the PDQ summary on Nutrition in Cancer Care, and information on skin rash in the PDQ summary on Pruritus.) Opportunistic infections are frequent because of an underlying immune deficiency. B-cell EBV genomes are detected in most affected patients.[80]

Doxorubicin-based combination chemotherapy, such as the CHOP regimen, is recommended as it is for other aggressive lymphomas.[77] The International Peripheral T-Cell Lymphoma Project involving 22 international centers identified 243 patients with AITL or ATCL; the 5-year OS and failure-free survival rates were 33% and 18%.[81] Myeloablative chemotherapy and radiation therapy with autologous or allogeneic peripheral stem cell support has been described in anecdotal reports.[69,82,83] Anecdotal responses have been reported for cyclosporine,[84] pralatrexate,[54] bendamustine,[85] the histone deacetylase inhibitor romidepsin, and brentuximab vedotin (even if there is little or no CD30 expression on the lymphoma).[53,86][Level of evidence: 3iiiDiv] Occasional spontaneous remissions and protracted responses to steroids only have been reported.

Peripheral T-cell Lymphoma

Patients with peripheral T-cell lymphoma have diffuse large cell or diffuse mixed lymphoma that expresses a cell surface phenotype of a postthymic (or peripheral) T-cell expressing CD4 or CD8 but not both together.[87] Peripheral T-cell lymphoma encompasses a group of heterogeneous nodal T-cell lymphomas that will require future delineation.[62] This includes the so-called Lennert lymphoma, a T-cell lymphoma admixed with a preponderance of lymphoepithelioid cells.

Therapeutic approaches

Therapy involves doxorubicin-based combination chemotherapy (such as CHOP), which is also used for DLBCL. Consolidation using high-dose chemotherapy with autologous or allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell support has been applied to patients with advanced-stage peripheral T-cell lymphoma after induction therapy with CHOP-based regimens and after response to reinduction therapy at first relapse. Evidence for this approach is anecdotal.[69,82,90,91] For relapsing patients, pralatrexate has shown a 30% response rate and a median 10-month duration of response for 109 evaluable patients in a prospective trial.[53,92][Level of evidence: 3iiiDiv] Also for relapsing patients, similar response rates were seen for romidepsin for 130 evaluable patients in a prospective trial.[53][Level of evidence: 3iiiDiv] Anecdotal responses have been seen with pralatrexate [54], bendamustine[85], and brentuximab vedotin (even if there is little or no CD30 expression on the lymphoma).[86][Level of evidence: 3iiiDiv] Anecdotal responses have also been seen with alemtuzumab, an anti-CD52 monoclonal antibody, or denileukin diftitox, a toxin-antibody ligand, after relapse from previous chemotherapy.[93,94] The median PFS after first relapse was less than 6 months in one series of 163 patients with peripheral T-cell lymphoma.[95]

An unusual type of peripheral T-cell lymphoma occurring mostly in young men, hepatosplenic T-cell lymphoma, appears to be localized to the hepatic and splenic sinusoids, with cell surface expression of the T-cell receptor gamma/delta.[96-100] Another variant, subcutaneous panniculitis-like T-cell lymphoma, is localized to subcutaneous tissue associated with hemophagocytic syndrome.[101-104] These patients have cells that express alpha-beta phenotype. Those with gamma-delta phenotype have a more aggressive clinical course and are classified as cutaneous gamma-delta T-cell lymphoma.[105-107] These patients may manifest involvement of the epidermis, dermis, subcutaneous region, or mucosa. These entities have extremely poor prognoses with an extremely aggressive clinical course and are treated within the same paradigm as the highest-risk groups with DLBCL.[69] An indolent T-cell lymphoproliferative disease of the gastrointestinal tract must be distinguished from peripheral T-cell lymphoma because no therapy may be indicated.[108]

Enteropathy-type Intestinal T-cell Lymphoma

Enteropathy-type intestinal T-cell lymphoma involves the small bowel of patients with gluten-sensitive enteropathy (celiac sprue).[62,109-111] Since a gluten-free diet prevents the development of lymphoma, patients diagnosed with celiac sprue in childhood rarely develop lymphoma. The diagnosis of celiac disease is usually made by finding villous atrophy in the resected intestine. Surgery is often required for diagnosis and to avoid perforation during therapy.

Therapy is with doxorubicin-based combination chemotherapy, but relapse rates appear higher than for comparably staged diffuse large cell lymphoma.[110-112] Complications of treatment include gastrointestinal bleeding, small bowel perforation, and enterocolic fistulae; patients often require parenteral nutrition. (Refer to the PDQ summaries on Gastrointestinal Complications and Nutrition in Cancer Care for more information on parenteral nutrition.) Multifocal intestinal perforations and visceral abdominal involvement are seen at the time of relapse. High-dose therapy with hematopoietic stem cell rescue has been applied in first remission or at relapse.[69,110,113][Level of evidence: 3iiiDiii] Evidence for this approach is anecdotal.

Intravascular Large B-cell Lymphoma (Intravascular Lymphomatosis)

Intravascular lymphomatosis is characterized by large cell lymphoma confined to the intravascular lumen. The brain, kidneys, lungs, and skin are the organs most likely affected by intravascular lymphomatosis.

With the use of aggressive combination chemotherapy, the prognosis is similar to more conventional presentations.[114,115]

Burkitt Lymphoma/Diffuse Small Noncleaved-cell Lymphoma

Burkitt lymphoma/diffuse small noncleaved-cell lymphoma typically involves younger patients and represents the most common type of pediatric NHL.[116] These types of aggressive extranodal B-cell lymphomas are characterized by translocation and deregulation of the C-myc gene on chromosome 8.[117] A subgroup of patients with dual translocation of C-myc and bcl-2 appear to have an extremely poor outcome despite aggressive therapy (5-month OS).[118][Level of evidence: 3iiiA]

In some patients with larger B cells, there is morphologic overlap with DLBCL. These Burkitt-like large cell lymphomas show C-myc deregulation, extremely high proliferation rates, and a gene-expression profile as expected for classic Burkitt lymphoma.[119-121] Endemic cases, usually from Africa, involve the facial bones or jaws of children, mostly containing EBV genomes. Sporadic cases usually involve the gastrointestinal system, ovaries, or kidneys. Patients present with rapidly growing masses and a very high LDH but are potentially curable with intensive doxorubicin-based combination chemotherapy.

Therapeutic approaches

Treatment of Burkitt lymphoma/diffuse small noncleaved-cell lymphoma involves aggressive multidrug regimens similar to those used for the advanced-stage aggressive lymphomas (diffuse large cell).[122-125] Aggressive combination chemotherapy, which is patterned after that used in childhood Burkitt lymphoma, has been described in CLB-9251 (NCT00002494), for example, and has been very successful for adult patients with more than 60% of advanced-stage patients free of disease at 5 years.[126-131] Adverse prognostic factors include bulky abdominal disease and high serum LDH. In some institutions, treatment includes the use of consolidative bone marrow transplantation (BMT).[132,133] Patients with Burkitt lymphoma have a 20% to 30% lifetime risk of CNS involvement. Prophylaxis with intrathecal chemotherapy is required as part of induction therapy.[134] (Refer to the PDQ summaries on Primary CNS Lymphoma Treatment and AIDS-Related Lymphoma Treatment for more information.)

Lymphoblastic Lymphoma

Lymphoblastic lymphoma (precursor T-cell) is a very aggressive form of NHL. It often occurs in young patients but not exclusively.[135] It is commonly associated with large mediastinal masses and has a high predilection for disseminating to bone marrow and to the CNS.

Treatment is usually patterned after that for acute lymphoblastic leukemia. Intensive combination chemotherapy with or without BMT is the standard treatment of this aggressive histologic type of NHL.[136-138] Radiation therapy is sometimes given to areas of bulky tumor masses. Because these forms of NHL tend to progress quickly, combination chemotherapy is instituted rapidly once the diagnosis has been confirmed. Careful review of the pathologic specimens, bone marrow aspirate, biopsy specimen, cerebrospinal fluid cytology, and lymphocyte marker constitute the most important aspects of the pretreatment staging workup. (Refer to the PDQ summary on Adult Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia Treatment for more information.)

Adult T-cell Leukemia/Lymphoma

Adult T-cell leukemia/lymphoma (ATL) is caused by infection with the retrovirus human T-lymphotrophic virus 1 and is frequently associated with lymphadenopathy, hypercalcemia, circulating leukemic cells, bone and skin involvement, hepatosplenomegaly, a rapidly progressive course, and poor response to combination chemotherapy.[139,140] ATL has been divided into four clinical subtypes: acute, lymphoma, chronic, and smoldering.[141,142]

The acute and lymphoma types of ATL have done poorly with strategies of combination chemotherapy and ASCT with a median OS under 1 year.[143-145] Using combination chemotherapy, less than 10%of 807 patients were alive after 4 years.[145] Anecdotal durable remissions have been reported after ASCT and even after subsequent donor lymphocyte infusion for relapses after transplant.[146][Level of evidence: 3iiiDiv] Among 585 patients who underwent ASCT, the 3-year OS was 36%.[147][Level of evidence: 3iiiA]

The combination of zidovudine and interferon-alpha has activity against ATL, even for patients who failed previous cytotoxic therapy. Durable remissions are seen in the majority of presenting patients with this combination but are not seen in patients with the lymphoma subtype of ATL.[148-152] Symptomatic local progression for all subtypes responds well to palliative radiation therapy.[153]

Mantle Cell Lymphoma

Mantle cell lymphoma is found in lymph nodes, the spleen, bone marrow, blood, and sometimes the gastrointestinal system (lymphomatous polyposis).[154-156] Mantle cell lymphoma is characterized by CD5-positive follicular mantle B cells, a translocation of chromosomes 11 and 14, and an overexpression of the cyclin D1 protein.[157,158]

Like the low-grade lymphomas, mantle cell lymphoma appears incurable with anthracycline-based chemotherapy and occurs in older patients with generally asymptomatic advanced-stage disease.[159] The median survival, however, is significantly shorter (3–5 years) than that of other lymphomas, and this histology is now considered to be an aggressive lymphoma.[160] A diffuse pattern and the blastoid variant have an aggressive course with shorter survival, while the mantle zone type may have a more indolent course.[161,162] A high cell-proliferation rate (increased Ki-67, mitotic index, beta-2-microglobulin) may be associated with a poorer prognosis.[157,163]

Therapeutic approaches

It is unclear which chemotherapeutic approach offers the best long-term survival in this clinicopathologic entity; early refractoriness to chemotherapy is a usual feature.[164,165] In a prospective randomized trial, 532 patients older than 60 years and not eligible for SCT were given either R-CHOP or R-FC (rituximab, fludarabine, cyclophosphamide) for 6 to 8 cycles, followed by maintenance therapy in responders randomly assigned to rituximab or interferon-alpha maintenance therapy.[166] With a median follow-up of 37 months, the OS was significantly shorter after R-FC than after R-CHOP (47% vs. 62%, P = .005; hazard ratio [HR]death, 1.50; 95% CI, 1.13–1.99).[166][Level of evidence: 1iiA] Event-free survival favored rituximab over interferon-alpha (57% PFS at 4 years vs. 34%, P = .01; HR, 0.55; 95% CI, 0.36–0.87), but OS did not differ significantly (79% vs. 67% at 4 years, P = .13).[166][Level of evidence: 1iiDi] However, patients who received R-CHOP induction showed an OS benefit for rituximab maintenance over interferon-alpha maintenance (87% vs. 63% at 4 years, P = .005).[166][Level of evidence: 3iiiA] A randomized trial compared bendamustine plus rituximab with R-CHOP and showed improved PFS (35 vs. 22 months; HR, 0.49; 95% CI, 0.28–0.79; P = .004) but no difference in OS.[167][Level of evidence: 1iiDiii]

Patients with low risk on the IPI may do well when initial therapy is deferred.[168][Level of evidence: 3iiiDiv] Many investigators are exploring high-dose chemoradioimmunotherapy with stem cell/marrow support or nonmyeloablative ASCT.[165,169-174] Thus far, randomized trials have not shown OS benefits from these newer approaches.[170] Bortezomib shows response rates close to 50% in relapsed patients, prompting clinical trials combining this proteasome inhibitor with rituximab and cytotoxic agents in first-line therapy.[175,176][Level of evidence: 3iiiDiv] The combination of lenalidomide and rituximab also shows response rates of around 50% in relapsed patients.[177][Level of evidence: 3iiDiv]

Polymorphic PTLD

Patients who undergo transplantation of the heart, lung, liver, kidney, or pancreas usually require lifelong immunosuppression. This may result in PTLD in 1% to 3% of recipients, which appears as an aggressive lymphoma.[178] Pathologists can distinguish a polyclonal B-cell hyperplasia from a monoclonal B-cell lymphoma; both are almost always associated with EBV.[179]

Prognosis

Therapeutic options

In some cases, withdrawal of immunosuppression results in eradication of the lymphoma.[182,183] When this is unsuccessful or not feasible, a trial of rituximab may be considered, because it has shown durable remissions in approximately 60% of patients and a favorable toxicity profile.[183,184] Sometimes, a combination of acyclovir and interferon-alpha has been used.[178,185] If these measures fail, doxorubicin-based combination chemotherapy is recommended, although most patients can avoid cytotoxic therapy.[186] Localized presentations can be controlled with surgery or radiation therapy alone. These localized mass lesions, which may grow over a period of months, are often phenotypically polyclonal and tend to occur within weeks or a few months after transplantation.[179] Multifocal, rapidly progressive disease occurs late after transplantation (>1 year) and is usually phenotypically monoclonal and associated with EBV.[187] These patients may have durable remissions using standard chemotherapy regimens for aggressive lymphoma.[187-189] Instances of EBV-negative PTLD occur even later (median, 5 years posttransplant) and have particularly poor prognoses.[190] A sustained clinical response after failure from chemotherapy was attained using an immunotoxin (anti-CD22 B-cell surface antigen antibody linked with ricin, a plant toxin).[191] An anti-interleukin-6 monoclonal antibody is also under clinical evaluation.[192]

True Histiocytic Lymphoma

True histiocytic lymphomas are very rare tumors that show histiocytic differentiation and express histiocytic markers in the absence of B-cell or T-cell lineage-specific immunologic markers.[193,194] Care must be taken with immunophenotypic tests to exclude ALCL or hemophagocytic syndromes caused by viral infections, especially EBV.

Therapeutic options

Therapy is modeled after the treatment of comparably staged diffuse large cell lymphomas, but the optimal approach remains to be defined.

Primary Effusion Lymphoma

Primary effusion lymphoma presents exclusively or mainly in the pleural, pericardial, or abdominal cavities in the absence of an identifiable tumor mass.[195] Patients are usually human immunodeficiency virus seropositive, and the tumor usually contains Kaposi sarcoma–associated herpes virus/human herpes virus 8.

Prognosis

The prognosis of primary effusion lymphoma is extremely poor.

Therapeutic approaches

Therapy is usually modeled after the treatment of comparably staged diffuse large cell lymphomas.

Stage Information for Adult NHL

Stage is important in selecting a treatment for patients with non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL). Chest and abdominal computed tomography (CT) scans are usually part of the staging evaluation for all lymphoma patients. The staging system is similar to the staging system used for Hodgkin lymphoma.

Common among patients with NHL is involvement of the following:

Noncontiguous lymph nodes.

Waldeyer ring.

Epitrochlear nodes.

Gastrointestinal tract.

Extranodal presentations. (A single extranodal site is occasionally the only site of involvement in patients with diffuse lymphoma.)

Bone marrow.

Liver (especially common in patients with low-grade lymphomas).

Cytologic examination of cerebrospinal fluid may be positive in patients with aggressive NHL. Involvement of hilar and mediastinal lymph nodes is less common than in Hodgkin lymphoma. Mediastinal adenopathy, however, is a prominent feature of lymphoblastic lymphoma and primary mediastinal B-cell lymphoma, entities primarily found in young adults.

The majority of patients with NHL present with advanced (stage III or stage IV) disease that can often be identified with limited staging procedures such as CT scanning and biopsies of the bone marrow and other accessible sites of involvement. Laparoscopic biopsy or laparotomy is not required for staging but may be necessary to establish a diagnosis or histologic type.[1] Positron emission tomography (PET) with fluorine-18-fluorodeoxyglucose can be used for initial staging and for follow-up after therapy as a supplement to CT scanning.[2-6] Interim PET scans after two to four cycles of therapy did not provide reliable prognostic information because of problems of interobserver reproducibility in a large cooperative group trial (ECOG-E344 [NCT00274924]) and lack of difference in outcome between PET-negative and PET-positive/biopsy-negative patients in two prospective trials.[7-9]

Staging Subclassification System

Table 2. Anatomic Stage/Prognostic Groupsa

Stage

Prognostic Groups

I

Involvement of a single lymphatic site (i.e., nodal region, Waldeyer ring, thymus or spleen) (I).

OR

Localized involvement of a single extralymphatic organ or site in the absence of any lymph node involvement (IE) (rare in Hodgkin lymphoma).

II

Involvement of two or more lymph node regions on the same side of the diaphragm (II).

OR

Localized involvement of a single extralymphatic organ or site in association with regional lymph node involvement with or without involvement of other lymph node regions on the same side of the diaphragm (IIE). The number of regions involved may be indicated by a subscript Arabic numeral, for example, II3.

III

Involvement of lymph node regions on both sides of the diaphragm (III), which also may be accompanied by extralymphatic extension in association with adjacent lymph node involvement (IIIE) or by involvement of the spleen (IIIS) or both (IIIE, IIIS). Splenic involvement is designated by the letter S.

IV

Diffuse or disseminated involvement of one or more extralymphatic organs, with or without associated lymph node involvement.

OR

Isolated extralymphatic organ involvement in the absence of adjacent regional lymph node involvement, but in conjunction with disease in distant site(s). Stage IV includes any involvement of the liver or bone marrow, lungs (other than by direct extension from another site), or cerebrospinal fluid.

The Ann Arbor staging system is commonly used for patients with NHL.[10,11] In this system, stage I, stage II, stage III, and stage IV adult NHL can be subclassified into A and B categories: B for those with well-defined generalized symptoms and A for those without such symptoms. The B designation is given to patients with any of the following symptoms:

Unexplained loss of more than 10% of body weight in the 6 months before diagnosis.

Unexplained fever with temperatures above 38°C.

Drenching night sweats.

Occasionally, specialized staging systems are used. The physician should be aware of the system used in a specific report.

The E designation is used when extranodal lymphoid malignancies arise in tissues separate from, but near, the major lymphatic aggregates. Stage IV refers to disease that is diffusely spread throughout an extranodal site, such as the liver. If pathologic proof of involvement of one or more extralymphatic sites has been documented, the symbol for the site of involvement, followed by a plus sign (+), is listed.

Table 3. Notation to Identify Specific Sites

N = nodes

H = liver

L = lung

M = bone marrow

S = spleen

P = pleura

O = bone

D = skin

Current practice assigns a clinical stage (CS) based on the findings of the clinical evaluation and a pathologic stage (PS) based on the findings made as a result of invasive procedures beyond the initial biopsy.

For example, on percutaneous biopsy, a patient with inguinal adenopathy and a positive lymphangiogram without systemic symptoms might be found to have involvement of the liver and bone marrow. The precise stage of such a patient would be CS IIA, PS IVA(H+)(M+).

A number of other factors that are not included in the above staging system are important for the staging and prognosis of patients with NHL. These factors include the following:

Age.

Performance status (PS).

Tumor size.

Lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) values.

The number of extranodal sites.

To identify subgroups of patients most likely to relapse, an international prognostic index was compiled for 2,031 patients with aggressive NHL.[12] After validation by several cancer centers,[13,14] the major cooperative groups have used this index in the design of new clinical trials. The model is simple to apply, reproducible, and predicts outcome even after patients have achieved a complete remission. The model identifies five significant risk factors prognostic of overall survival (OS):

Age (<60 years vs. >60 years).

Serum LDH (normal vs. elevated).

PS (0 or 1 vs. 2–4).

Stage (stage I or stage II vs. stage III or stage IV).

Extranodal site involvement (0 or 1 vs. 2–4).

Patients with two or more risk factors have a less than 50% chance of relapse-free survival and OS at 5 years. This study also identifies patients at high risk of relapse based on specific sites of involvement, including bone marrow, central nervous system, liver, lung, and spleen. The bcl-2 gene and rearrangement of the myc gene or dual overexpression of the myc gene, or both, confer a particularly poor prognosis.[15-18] Patients at high risk of relapse may benefit from consolidation therapy or other approaches under clinical evaluation.[12] Molecular profiles of gene expression using DNA microarrays may help to stratify patients in the future for therapies directed at specific targets and to better predict survival after standard chemotherapy.[19,20]

Treatment Option Overview for Adult NHL

Treatment of non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) depends on the histologic type and stage. Many of the improvements in survival have been made using clinical trials (experimental therapy) that have attempted to improve on the best available accepted therapy (conventional or standard therapy).

In asymptomatic patients with indolent forms of advanced NHL, treatment may be
deferred until the patient becomes symptomatic as the disease progresses. When
treatment is deferred, the clinical course of patients with indolent NHL
varies; frequent and careful observation is required so that effective
treatment can be initiated when the clinical course of the disease accelerates.
Some patients have a prolonged indolent course, but others have disease that
rapidly evolves into more aggressive types of NHL that require immediate
treatment.

Radiation techniques differ somewhat from those used in the treatment of
Hodgkin lymphoma. The dose of radiation therapy usually varies from 25 Gy to
50 Gy and is dependent on factors that include the histologic type of
lymphoma, the patient’s stage and overall condition, the goal of treatment
(curative or palliative), the proximity of sensitive surrounding organs, and
whether the patient is being treated with radiation therapy alone or in
combination with chemotherapy. Given the patterns of
disease presentations and relapse, treatment may need to include unusual sites
such as Waldeyer ring, epitrochlear, or mesenteric nodes. The
associated morbidity of the treatment must be considered carefully. The
majority of patients who receive radiation are usually treated on only one side
of the diaphragm. Localized presentations of extranodal NHL may be treated
with involved-field techniques with significant (>50%) success.

Even though standard treatment in patients with lymphomas can cure a significant fraction, numerous clinical trials that explore improvements in treatment are in progress. If possible, patients should be included in these studies. Standardized guidelines for response assessment have been suggested for use in clinical trials.[1]

Aggressive lymphomas are increasingly seen in human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-positive patients; treatment
of these patients requires special consideration. (Refer to the PDQ summary on
AIDS-Related Lymphoma Treatment for more information.)

In addition to screening for HIV among patients with aggressive lymphomas, active hepatitis B or hepatitis C should be assessed prior to treatment with rituximab and/or chemotherapy.[2,3] Even patients with undetectable hepatitis B viral loads after remote past infection benefit from prophylaxis with entecavir in the context of rituximab therapy.[4] Similarly, prophylaxis for herpes zoster with acyclovir or valcyclovir and prophylaxis for pneumocystis with trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole or dapsone are usually applied with rituximab with or without combination chemotherapy.

Several unusual presentations of lymphoma occur that often require somewhat modified approaches to staging and therapy. The reader is referred to reviews for a more detailed description of extranodal presentations in the gastrointestinal system,[5-13] thyroid,[14,15] spleen,[16] testis,[17-19] paranasal sinuses,[20-23] bone,[24,25] orbit,[26-30] and skin.[31-40]

Treatment for Indolent, Stage I and Contiguous Stage II Adult NHL

Although localized presentations are uncommon in non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL), the goal of treatment should be to cure the disease in patients who are shown to have truly localized occurrence after undergoing appropriate staging procedures.

The National Lymphocare Study identified 471 patients with stage I follicular lymphoma. Of those patients, 206 were rigorously staged with a bone marrow aspirate and biopsy, and computed tomography (CT) scans or positive-emission tomography (PET-CT) scans.[1] Nonrandomized treatments included radiation therapy (27%), rituximab-chemotherapy (R-chemotherapy) (28%), watchful waiting (17%), R-chemotherapy plus radiation therapy (13%), and rituximab alone (12%), although more than one-third of the patients started with expectant therapy. With a median follow-up of 57 months, progression-free survival favored R-chemotherapy or R-chemotherapy plus radiation therapy, but overall survival was nearly identical, all over 90%.[1][Level of evidence: 3iiiD] Clinical trials are required to answer questions such as:[2]

If the PET-CT scan is clear after excisional biopsy, is watchful waiting or radiation therapy preferred?

Should rituximab be added to radiation therapy for stage I follicular lymphoma?

Is there any role for R-chemotherapy plus radiation therapy?

Radiation therapy

Long-term disease control within radiation fields can be achieved in a significant number of patients with indolent stage I or stage II NHL by using dosages of radiation that usually range from 25 Gy to 40 Gy to involved sites or to extended fields that cover adjacent nodal sites.[3-7] Almost half of all patients treated with radiation therapy alone will relapse out-of-field within 10 years.[8]

Rituximab with or without chemotherapy

For symptomatic patients who require therapy, when radiation therapy is contraindicated or when an alternative treatment is preferred, rituximab with or without chemotherapy can be employed (as outlined below for more advanced-stage patients). The value of adjuvant treatment with radiation to decrease relapse, plus rituximab (an anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody) either alone or in combination with chemotherapy, has been extrapolated from trials of patients with advanced-stage disease and has not been confirmed.[9,10]

Watchful waiting

Watchful waiting can be considered for asymptomatic patients.[11] Watchful waiting has never been compared with upfront radiation therapy in a prospective randomized trial; a retrospective analysis of the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results Program (SEER) database over 30 years showed improved outcomes for upfront radiation therapy.[12]

Other therapies as designated for patients with advanced-stage disease

Patients with involvement that is not able to be encompassed by radiation therapy are treated as outlined for patients with stage III or stage IV low-grade lymphoma.

Treatment for Indolent, Noncontiguous Stage II/III/IV Adult NHL

Optimal treatment of advanced stages of low-grade non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) is controversial because of low cure rates with the current therapeutic options. Numerous clinical trials are in progress to settle treatment issues, and patients should be urged to participate. The rate of relapse is fairly constant over time, even in patients who have achieved complete response to treatment. Indeed, relapse may occur many years after treatment. Currently, no randomized trials guide clinicians about the initial choice of watchful waiting, rituximab, nucleoside analogs, alkylating agents, combination chemotherapy, radiolabeled monoclonal antibodies, or combinations of these options.[1]; [2][Level of evidence: 1iiDiii]

For patients with indolent, noncontiguous stage II and stage III non-Hodgkin lymphoma, central lymphatic radiation therapy has been proposed but is not usually recommended as a form of treatment.[3,4]

Numerous prospective clinical trials of interferon-alpha, including SWOG-8809, have shown no consistent benefit; the role of interferon in patients with indolent lymphoma remains controversial.[5-16]

Watchful waiting for asymptomatic patients

The rate of relapse is fairly constant over time, even in patients who have achieved complete responses to treatment. Indeed, relapse may occur many years after treatment. In this category, deferred treatment (i.e., watchful waiting until the patient becomes symptomatic before initiating treatment) should be considered.[2,17-19]

All three trials showed no difference in cause-specific or overall survival (OS).

For patients randomly assigned to watchful waiting, the median time to require therapy was 2 to 3 years and one-third of patients never required treatment with watchful waiting (half died of other causes and half remained progression free after 10 years).

A selected group of 107 patients with advanced stage follicular lymphoma were managed with initial watchful waiting; with a median delay of 55 months, subsequent therapy resulted in equivalent freedom from treatment failure and OS compared with a similar cohort treated immediately with rituximab.[22][Level of evidence: 3iiiDiii] This implies that watchful waiting remains a relevant approach even in the rituximab era.

Rituximab

Rituximab may be considered as first-line therapy, either alone or in combination with other agents.

Rituximab alone, as was shown in the ECOG-E4402 (NCT00075946) trial, for example.[23-27]

Standard therapy includes rituximab, an anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody, either alone or in combination with purine nucleoside analogs such as fludarabine or 2-chlorodeoxyadenosine, alkylating agents (with or without steroids), or combination chemotherapy.

A prospective, randomized trial of 534 patients with previously untreated, advanced-stage follicular lymphoma compared R-CHOP, R-FM, and R-CVP. With a median follow-up of 34 months, there was no difference in OS, but the 3-year PFS favored R-CHOP (68%) and R-FM (63%) over R-CVP (52%) (P for the three regimens = .011).[40][Level of evidence: 1iiDiii]

Evidence (rituximab):

Four randomized, prospective studies of previously untreated patients (involving more than 1,300 patients) and one Cochrane meta-analysis including both untreated and previously treated patients (involving almost 1,000 patients) have compared rituximab plus combination chemotherapy with chemotherapy alone.[33,36,41]; [42,43][Level of evidence: 1iiA]

Rituximab plus chemotherapy was superior in terms of event-free survival or progression-free survival (PFS) (ranging from 2–3 years) in all of the studies and in terms of OS in all but one study (absolute benefit ranging from 6%–13% at 4 years, P < .04 and hazard ratio [HR] = 0.63 [0.51–0.79] for the meta-analysis).

All of these trials were performed in symptomatic patients who required therapy. These results do not negate watchful waiting when appropriate.

FDG-PET-CT (fluorine-18-fluorodeoxyglucose–positron-emission tomography–computed tomography) scan status at the completion of rituximab plus chemotherapy induction therapy is strongly predictive of outcome. It is not yet known if acting on the results of the scans translates into better outcomes.[44,45]

Obinutuzumab

Obinutuzumab is an alternative CD20-binding monoclonal antibody with alternative epitope binding and is being studied in patients with recurrent follicular lymphoma. This agent has shown responses in 20% to 30% of patients when used alone and in 80% of patients when combined with CHOP or FC (fludarabine and cyclophosphamide) in relapsed follicular lymphoma patients.[46,47][Level of evidence: 3iiiDiv]

Purine nucleoside analogs

Alkylating agents (with or without steroids)

Bendamustine

Evidence (bendamustine):

In a prospective randomized trial NCT00991211, 527 patients with indolent and mantle cell lymphoma were randomly assigned to a bendamustine-plus-rituximab arm versus an R-CHOP arm.[29][Level of evidence: 1iiDiii]

Combination chemotherapy

CHOP: cyclophosphamide + doxorubicin + vincristine + prednisone.[52,57] A Cochrane meta-analysis could not identify any OS benefit to adding doxorubicin to chemotherapy regimens with rituximab or to chemotherapy regimens without rituximab.[37][Level of evidence: 1iiA]

Yttrium-90–labeled ibritumomab tiuxetan

Yttrium-90–labeled ibritumomab tiuxetan is available for previously untreated and relapsing patients with minimal (<25%) or no marrow involvement with lymphoma (iodine-131–labeled tositumomab is no longer available because of commercial disengagement).[60-62] In a randomized, prospective trial, 554 patients with previously untreated advanced-stage follicular lymphoma received either R-CHOP times six cycles or CHOP times six cycles followed by I-131 tositumomab radioimmunotherapy (RIT); with a median follow-up of 4.9 years, there was no significant difference between the PFS and OS (2-year OS, R-CHOP, 97%; CHOP-RIT, 93%; P = .08).[63][Level of evidence: 1iiD] Because a significant prolongation of PFS was seen for R-CHOP followed by rituximab maintenance compared with R-CHOP alone,[64] this lack of benefit for CHOP-RIT was particularly disappointing. Iodine-131–labeled tositumomab became commercially unavailable in 2013.

In a randomized trial of 409 patients with stage III or IV follicular lymphoma who achieved a complete or partial response, yttrium-90 ibritumomab tiuxetan consolidation versus no consolidation was evaluated. The radiolabelled antibody consolidation improved median PFS by 3 years (P < .001), and median time to next treatment was improved by 5.1 years (P < .001); however, there was no change in OS.[65][Level of evidence: 1iiDiii]

Maintenance rituximab

After induction therapy with rituximab only or with rituximab plus chemotherapy, rituximab can be used once every 2 to 3 months. Several studies have evaluated this approach.

Evidence (maintenance rituximab):

In the PRIMA (NCT00140582) study, 1,019 high-risk, previously untreated, symptomatic patients achieved complete or partial response after induction therapy with immunochemotherapy (usually R-CHOP) and were then randomly assigned to 2 years of maintenance rituximab versus no maintenance.[64][Level of evidence: 1iiDiii]

In the UK/International study (NCT00112931), 379 previously untreated patients with asymptomatic, low-burden disease were randomly asssigned to watchful waiting versus rituximab induction only versus rituximab induction followed by 2 years of rituximab maintenance.[66][Level of evidence: 1iiC]

Although OS and histologic transformation rates were no different at 3 years, maintenance rituximab was favored based on quality-of-life studies (Mental Adjustment to Cancer Scale P = .0004 at 7 months, Illness Coping Score P = .0012 at 7 months) and time-to-initiation of new treatment by 3 years (54% for watchful waiting vs. 12% for rituximab maintenance [HR, 0.21; 95% CI, 0.14–0.31, P < .0001]).

This study suggested that for some patients, "watch and wait" resulted in "watch and worry."[67] However, from the perspective of OS and histologic transformation rates, no benefit could be seen with rituximab maintenance.

In a prospective, randomized trial of 465 patients with relapsed follicular lymphoma, responders to R-CHOP or CHOP were further randomly assigned to rituximab maintenance (one dose every 3 months for 2 years) or no maintenance.[68][Level of evidence: 1iiDiii]

This benefit for maintenance was evident even for patients who received rituximab during induction therapy. Most patients in both arms received extensive rituximab during post-protocol salvage treatment.

In a prospective, randomized trial of 280 patients with relapsed follicular lymphoma, responders to chemotherapy and autologous stem cell transplantation consolidation were randomly assigned to four doses of rituximab maintenance or no maintenance.[69][Level of evidence: 1iiDiii]

With an 8.3 year median follow-up, the 10-year PFS favored maintenance (54% vs. 37% [HR, 0.66; 95%CI, 0.47–0.91, P = .012]), but there was no difference in OS.

Many questions remain about rituximab maintenance, particularly about truncating therapy at 2 years and long-term safety and efficacy. The most salient question is whether a strategy of observation after induction with rituximab therapy at time of symptomatic progression is equivalent or superior to mandated rituximab maintenance.[71]

Since none of the standard therapies listed above are curative for advanced-stage disease, innovative approaches are under clinical evaluation. The approaches include intensive therapy with chemotherapy and total-body irradiation (TBI) followed by autologous or allogeneic bone marrow transplantation (BMT) or peripheral stem cell transplantation (PSCT), and the use of idiotype vaccines and radiolabeled monoclonal antibodies.

Intensive therapy with chemotherapy with or without TBI or high-dose radioimmunotherapy followed by autologous or allogeneic BMT or PSCT is under clinical evaluation.[72-81]

Treatment for Indolent, Recurrent Adult NHL

In general, treatment with standard agents rarely produces a cure in patients whose disease has relapsed. Sustained remissions after relapse can often be obtained in patients with indolent lymphomas, but relapse will usually ensue. Favorable survival after relapse has been associated with an age younger than 60 years, complete remission rather than partial remission, and duration of response longer than 1 year. Even the most favorable subset, however, has a tenfold greater mortality compared with age-adjusted U.S. population rates.[1]

Patients who experience a relapse with indolent lymphoma can often have their disease controlled with single agent or combination chemotherapy, rituximab (an anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody), lenalidomide, radiolabeled anti-CD20 monoclonal antibodies, or palliative radiation therapy.[2,3] Long-term freedom from second relapse, however, is uncommon and multiple relapses will usually occur. Patients with indolent lymphoma may experience a relapse with a more aggressive histology. If the clinical pattern of relapse suggests that the disease is behaving in a more aggressive manner, a biopsy should be performed. Documentation of conversion to a more aggressive histology requires an appropriate change to therapy applicable to that histologic type.[4] Rapid growth or discordant growth between various disease sites may indicate a histologic conversion.

In a retrospective review of 325 patients between 1972 and 1999, the risk of histologic transformation was 30% by 10 years from diagnosis.[5] In this series, high risk factors for subsequent histologic transformation were advanced stage, high-risk Follicular Lymphoma International Prognostic Index, and expectant management. The median survival after transformation was 1 to 2 years, with 25% of patients alive at 5 years and with approximately 10% to 20% of patients alive 10 years after re-treatment.[6]

A prospective trial of 631 patients with follicular lymphoma and with a median follow-up of 60 months in the rituximab era (2002–2009) found a 5-year transformation rate (11%) to a higher-grade histology.[7] The median overall survival (OS) after transformation was 50 months, and the 5-year OS rate was 66%, if the transformation occurred more than 18 months after a diagnosis of follicular lymphoma. This series describes a better prognosis for patients with transformation than was experienced by patients in the prerituximab era.

(Refer to the Treatment for Aggressive, Recurrent Adult NHL section of this summary for descriptions of the regimens used to treat histologic conversions.) The durability of the second remission may be short, and clinical trials should be considered.

Chemotherapy (single agent or combination)

Significant activity for fludarabine and 2-chlorodeoxyadenosine has been demonstrated in relapsed low-grade lymphomas, both as single agents and in combination with other drugs.[8-13] Patients may respond to the original induction regimen again, especially if the duration of remission exceeds 1 year. For relapsing patients, rituximab alone or in combination with agents not previously used may induce remissions.

Rituximab

Rituximab results in a 40% to 50% response rate in patients who relapse with indolent B-cell lymphomas.[14-17] Rituximab can also be combined with combination chemotherapy.[18]

Evidence (rituximab):

In three randomized, prospective studies involving previously treated patients with relapsed indolent lymphoma, patients were randomly assigned to rituximab maintenance after retreatment with combination chemotherapy (with or without rituximab during induction) or rituximab alone; all trials showed prolongation of response duration,[19-21] and one trial demonstrated improvement in median progression-free survival (PFS) (3.7 years vs. 1.3 years, P < .001) and OS (74% vs. 64%, P = .07) at 5 years with a median follow-up of 39 months favoring maintenance rituximab.[20]

Lenalidomide

Responses of 20% to 30% have been reported for lenalidomide, especially for follicular lymphoma and small lymphocytic lymphoma.[22][Level of evidence: 3iiiDiv]

Radiolabeled anti-CD20 monoclonal antibodies

Durable responses to radiolabeled monoclonal antibodies, such as yttrium-90 ibritumomab (commercially available) and iodine-131 tositumomab (commercially unavailable), have also been reported before and after cytotoxic chemotherapy.[23-28][Level of evidence: 1iiDiii]

A prospective trial of 409 patients with follicular lymphoma who responded to induction chemotherapy were randomly assigned to yttrium-90 ibritumomab or no further consolidation; with a median follow-up of 7.3 years, the 8-year PFS favored ibritumomab (41% vs. 22% [HR, 0.47; P < .001), but there was no difference in OS.[29][Level of evidence: 1iiDiii]

Palliative radiation therapy

Palliation may be achieved with very low-dose (4 Gy) involved-field radiation therapy in two fractions for patients with indolent and aggressive relapsed disease.[30] In a prospective randomized trial, treatment with 4 Gy was inferior to treatment with 24 Gy in 12 fractions in PFS (77% vs. 92%, P < .0001).[31][Level of evidence: 1iiDiii]

Stem cell transplant. In many institutions, autologous or allogeneic stem cell transplantations are being used for patients whose disease has relapsed. Such an approach is still under evaluation but should be considered in the context of a clinical trial.[32-36]

Evidence (stem cell transplant):

The German Low-Grade Lymphoma Study Group treated 307 patients with follicular lymphoma with two cycles of CHOP (cyclophosphamide,
doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone)-like induction chemotherapy and then randomly assigned them to autologous stem cell transplantation versus interferon maintenance.[37] With a median follow-up of 4.2 years, the 5-year PFS was 65% for transplantation versus 33% for interferon (P < .001), but with no difference in OS.[37][Level of evidence: 1iiDiii]

Current Clinical Trials

Check for U.S. clinical trials from NCI's list of cancer clinical trials that are now accepting patients with
indolent, recurrent adult non-Hodgkin lymphoma. The list of clinical trials can be further narrowed by location, drug, intervention, and other criteria.

General information about clinical trials is also available from the NCI Web site.

R-CHOP with or without IF-XRT

Four prospective randomized trials have evaluated the comparison of CHOP or more intensive CHOP-based chemotherapy alone versus combined–modality therapy with CHOP and IF-XRT.[1-5]

Evidence (CHOP vs. CHOP with IF-XRT):

In a randomized trial with 7 years' median follow-up, 576 patients older than 60 years with early-stage disease received four cycles of CHOP with or without IF-XRT; there was no difference in 5-year event-free survival (EFS) (61% vs. 64%, P = .5) or overall survival (OS) (72% vs. 68%, P = .6).[1][Level of evidence: 1iiA]

A randomized trial of 401 patients comparing eight cycles of CHOP with three cycles of CHOP with IF-XRT was initially reported as having an OS advantage for the combined–modality arm at 5 years,[2] but a re-evaluation for OS at 9 years showed no difference in either arm of the study.[3][Level of evidence: 1iiA]

A randomized study (EST-1484) of 210 patients who attained a radiologic complete remission after eight cycles of CHOP compared IF-XRT with no further therapy; there was no difference in OS at 10 years (68% vs. 65%, P = .24).[4][Level of evidence: 1iiA]

The confirmation of efficacy for rituximab in advanced-stage disease as evidenced in SWOG-S0014 (NCT00005089), for example, has suggested the use of R-CHOP with or without radiation therapy but its use is only supported by retrospective comparisons.[6][Level of evidence: 3iiiDiii]

R-CHOP (rituximab, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone); four to six cycles.

R-CHOP (three to six cycles) + IF-XRT.

Evidence (R-CHOP vs. CHOP):

A randomized study (DSHNHL-1999-1A [NCT00052936]) of 1,222 patients older than 60 years compared R-CHOP given every 2 weeks for six or eight cycles with CHOP given every 2 weeks for six or eight cycles.[7] Although patients with early-stage disease were included in this trial, most patients had advanced-stage disease.

With a median follow-up of 72 months, the EFS favored R-CHOP given every 2 weeks for six or eight cycles (EFS at 6 y, 74% vs. 56%; P < .001).

The OS favored R-CHOP for only six cycles because of increased toxicity in the eight-cycle arm (OS at 6 y, 90% vs. 80%, P = .0004.[8][Level of evidence: 1iiA]

There has been no comparison to standard R-CHOP or CHOP given every 3 weeks. There are no comparative studies to establish an optimal number of chemotherapy cycles for patients with early-stage disease.

R-CHOP

The following studies established R-CHOP as the standard regimen for newly diagnosed patients with DLBCL.[2] Dose intensification of R-CHOP by a 14-day versus a 21-day cycle did not result in improved outcomes.[3]

A randomized study (DSHNHL-1999-1A [NCT00052936]) of 1,222 patients older than 60 years compared R-CHOP given every 2 weeks for six or eight cycles with CHOP given every 2 weeks for six or eight cycles.[7] With a median follow-up of 72 months, the EFS favored R-CHOP given every 2 weeks for six or eight cycles (EFS at 6 years, 74% vs. 56%; P < .0001). The OS favored R-CHOP for only six cycles because of increased toxicity in the eight-cycle arm (OS at 6 years, 90% vs. 80%; P = .0004).[7][Level of evidence: 1iiA] There was no comparison to standard R-CHOP or CHOP given every 3 weeks.

A trial (NCT00140595) of 380 patients younger than 60 years with DLBCL and an age-adjusted International Prognostic Index (IPI) rating of 1 randomly assigned treatment of patients to ACVBP and rituximab (R-ACVBP) plus consolidation with methotrexate, ifosfamide, etoposide, and cytarabine versus CHOP and rituximab.[8] With a median follow-up of 44 months, 3-year OS favored R-ACVBP (92% vs. 84%; hazard ratio, 0.44; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.28–0.81, P = .007).[8][Level of evidence: 1iiA] The significantly worse toxicities with R-ACVBP, the narrow target population (<60 years with either elevated lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) or stage III-stage IV disease, but not both), and the lack of a confirmatory trial may inhibit adoption of R-ACVBP as a new standard of care.

Clinical trials continue to explore modifications of CHOP and rituximab with CHOP by increasing doses, reducing intervals between cycles, combining new drugs with new mechanisms of action, or applying extra doses of rituximab at the start and after completion of chemotherapy..[3,9-15] None of these trials establishes a survival advantage for reduced intervals between cycles or for increasing doses of the chemotherapy.

Additive radiation therapy

After R-CHOP chemotherapy, involved-field radiation therapy has been proposed for initial bulky sites of disease (≥7.5 cm) or to extralymphatic sites; a nonrandomized cohort study (RICOVER-noRTH) suggested improved EFS, but not progression-free survival or OS.[16][Level of evidence: 3iiiDi] Future trials will focus on whether mid-treatment or end-of-treatment positron emission tomography–computed tomography can define whether radiation therapy should be used after systemic therapy.

Other combination chemotherapy

Doxorubicin-based combination chemotherapy produces long-term DFS in 35% to 45% of patients.[2,4,5] Higher cure rates have been reported in single-institution studies than in cooperative group trials.

Evidence (other combination chemotherapy):

A prospective, randomized trial of four regimens (CHOP, ProMACE CytaBOM, m-BACOD, and MACOP-B) for patients with DLBCL showed no difference in OS or time-to-treatment failure at 3 years.[17][Level of evidence: 1iiA]

Other randomized trials have confirmed no advantage among the standard doxorubicin-based combinations versus CHOP.[18]; [19]Level of evidence: 1iiA]

Stage IE or IIE gastric DLBCL

Four case series involving more than 100 patients with stage IE or IIE disease (with or without associated mucosa-associated lymphatic tissue) and with positive Helicobacter pylori infection reported that more than 50% of patients attained a durable complete remission after appropriate antibiotic therapy to eradicate H. pylori.[21-24][Level of evidence: 3iiiDiv]

Patients with two or more risk factors have a less than 50% chance of relapse-free survival and OS at 5 years. This study also identifies patients at high risk of relapse based on specific sites of involvement, including bone marrow, central nervous system (CNS), liver, lung, and spleen. The bcl-2 gene and rearrangement of the myc gene or dual overexpression of the myc gene, or both, confer a particularly poor prognosis.[26-29] Patients at high risk of relapse may be considered for clinical trials.[30] Molecular profiles of gene expression using DNA microarrays may help to stratify patients in the future for therapies directed at specific targets and to better predict survival after standard chemotherapy.[31,32]

CNS prophylaxis

CNS prophylaxis (usually with four to six injections of methotrexate intrathecally) is recommended for patients with paranasal sinus or testicular involvement. Some clinicians are employing high-dose intravenous methotrexate (usually four doses) as an alternative to intrathecal therapy because drug delivery is improved and patient morbidity is decreased.[35] CNS prophylaxis for bone marrow involvement is controversial; some investigators recommend it, and others do not.[17,36]

A retrospective analysis of 605 patients with diffuse large cell lymphoma who did not receive prophylactic intrathecal therapy identified an elevated serum LDH and more than one extranodal site as independent risk factors for CNS recurrence. Patients with both risk factors have a 17% probability of CNS recurrence at 1 year after diagnosis (95% CI, 7%–28%) versus 2.8% (95% CI, 2.7%–2.9%) for the remaining patients.[37][Level of evidence: 3iiiDiii]

Patients with diffuse, small, noncleaved-cell/Burkitt's lymphoma or lymphoblastic lymphoma have a 20% to 30% lifetime risk of CNS involvement. CNS prophylaxis is recommended for these histologies.

Several randomized, prospective trials evaluated the role of autologous BMT or SCT consolidation versus chemotherapy alone in patients in first remission with diffuse large cell lymphoma.[38-45]; [46,47][Level of evidence: 1iiA] Although some of these trials demonstrated significant increases in EFS (by 10% to 20%) among patients who received high-dose therapy, significant differences in OS could not be demonstrated prospectively in any of the series.

Retrospective analyses of high-intermediate (two risk factors) or high-risk (more than three risk factors) patients as defined by IPI suggest improved survival with BMT in two of the trials.[39,45] These studies do not establish that high-dose consolidation is of value to patients with aggressive lymphoma who are truly at high risk of relapse, and they also demonstrate that EFS may be a poor surrogate for OS for these patients.[48]

Radiation therapy consolidation to sites of bulky disease.

After R-CHOP induction chemotherapy (or similar regimens), the addition of involved-field radiation therapy to sites of initial bulky disease (≥5–10 cm) or to extralymphatic sites remains controversial.[16,49,50] Increased risks, such as long-term toxicities (e.g., second malignancies), must be considered.

Treatment for Adult Lymphoblastic Lymphoma

Lymphoblastic lymphoma is a very aggressive form of non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL), which often occurs in young patients, but not exclusively. Lymphoblastic lymphoma is commonly associated with large mediastinal masses and has a high predilection for disseminating to bone marrow and the central nervous system (CNS). The treatment paradigms are based on trials for acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) since lymphoblastic lymphoma and ALL are considered different manifestations of the same biologic disease. (Refer to the PDQ summary on Adult Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia Treatment for more information.)
Treatment is usually patterned after ALL. Intensive combination chemotherapy with CNS prophylaxis is the standard treatment of this aggressive histologic type of NHL. Radiation therapy is sometimes given to areas of bulky tumor masses. Since these forms of NHL tend to progress quickly, combination chemotherapy is instituted rapidly once the diagnosis has been confirmed.

The most important aspects of the pretreatment staging workup include careful review of the following pathological specimens:

Bone marrow aspirate.

Biopsy specimen.

Cerebrospinal fluid cytology.

Lymphocyte marker.

Standard Treatment Options for Adult Lymphoblastic Lymphoma

Standard Treatment Options for Adult Lymphoblastic Lymphoma include the following:

Radiation therapy

New treatment approaches are being developed by the national cooperative groups. Other approaches include the use of bone marrow transplantation for consolidation. (Refer to the PDQ summary on Adult Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia Treatment for more information.)

Current Clinical Trials

Check for U.S. clinical trials from NCI's list of cancer clinical trials that are now accepting patients with
adult lymphoblastic lymphoma. The list of clinical trials can be further narrowed by location, drug, intervention, and other criteria.

General information about clinical trials is also available from the NCI Web site.

Aggressive multidrug regimens

Standard treatment for diffuse, small, noncleaved-cell/Burkitt lymphoma is usually with aggressive multidrug regimens similar to those used for the advanced-stage aggressive lymphomas (such as diffuse large cell).[2-4] In some institutions, treatment includes the use of consolidative bone marrow transplantation.[5,6] Adverse prognostic factors include bulky abdominal disease and high serum lactate dehydrogenase.

Evidence (aggressive multidrug regimens):

An intensive clinical trial (CLB-9251 [NCT00002494]) used aggressive combination chemotherapy patterned after that used in childhood Burkitt lymphoma and has been very successful for adult patients.[7-11] More than 60% of advanced-stage patients were free of disease at 5 years.[7-12]

Central nervous system (CNS) prophylaxis

Patients with diffuse, small, noncleaved-cell/Burkitt lymphoma have a 20% to 30% lifetime risk of CNS involvement. CNS prophylaxis with methotrexate is recommended for all patients, usually given as four to six intrathecal injections.[13] (Refer to the PDQ summary on Adult Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia Treatment for more information).

Evidence (CNS prophylaxis):

In a series of 41 patients treated with systemic and intrathecal chemotherapy, 44% of those who presented with CNS disease and 13% of those who relapsed with CNS involvement became long-term disease-free survivors.[14] CNS relapse patterns were similar whether or not patients received radiation therapy, but increased neurologic deficits were noted among those patients who received radiation therapy.

Current Clinical Trials

Check for U.S. clinical trials from NCI's list of cancer clinical trials that are now accepting patients with
adult Burkitt lymphoma. The list of clinical trials can be further narrowed by location, drug, intervention, and other criteria.

General information about clinical trials is also available from the NCI Web site.

Bone marrow or stem cell transplantation

Bone marrow transplantation (BMT) is the treatment of choice for patients whose lymphoma has relapsed.[1] Preliminary studies indicate that approximately 20% to 40% of patients will have a long-term disease-free status, but the precise percentage depends on patient selection and the specific treatment used. Preparative drug regimens have varied; some investigators also use total-body irradiation. Similar success has been achieved using autologous marrow, with or without marrow purging, and allogeneic marrow.[2-6]

Evidence (BMT):

In a prospective, randomized study, (EORTC-PARMA), 215 patients in first or second relapse of aggressive lymphoma, younger than 60 years, and with no bone marrow or central nervous system involvement, were given two cycles of intensive combination chemotherapy. The 109 patients who responded were randomly assigned to receive four more cycles of chemotherapy and involved-field radiation therapy (IF-XRT) versus autologous BMT followed by IF-XRT. With a 5-year median follow-up, the event-free survival (EFS) was significantly improved with transplantation (46% vs. 12%). Overall survival (OS) was also significantly better with transplantation (53% vs. 32%).[7][Level of evidence: 1iiA] Salvage BMT was unsuccessful for patients on the nontransplant arm whose disease relapsed.

In general, patients who responded to initial therapy and who responded to conventional therapy for relapse prior to the BMT have had the best results.[8]

In a prospective trial, patients who relapsed late (>12 months after diagnosis) had better OS than patients who relapsed earlier (8-year survival was 29% vs. 13%, P = .001).[9][Level of evidence: 3iiiA]

Peripheral stem cell transplantation (SCT) has yielded results equivalent to standard autologous transplantation.[10,11] Even patients who never experienced complete remission with conventional chemotherapy may have prolonged progression-free survival (31% at 5 years) after high-dose chemotherapy and hematopoietic SCT if they retain chemosensitivity to reinduction therapy.[12][Level of evidence: 3iiiDiii] Some patients who relapse after a previous autologous transplantation can have durable remissions after myeloablative or nonmyeloablative allogeneic SCT.[13,14]; [15][Level of evidence: 3iiiDiv]

Evidence (peripheral SCT):

In a randomized prospective trial, 396 patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma in first relapse or who were refractory to first-line therapy received either R-ICE (rituximab, ifosfamide, etoposide, and carboplatin) or R-DHAP (rituximab,
dexamethasone, high-dose cytarabine, and cisplatin) followed by autologous SCT; there was no difference in 3-year EFS or OS.[16][Level of evidence: 1iiA]

In two phase II trials, 49 patients showed a 19% to 35% overall response rate to lenalidomide with or without rituximab.[27,28][Level of evidence: 3iiiDiv]

Durable responses to radiolabeled monoclonal antibodies have been reported for transformed low-grade B-cell lymphoma.[23,24] Not infrequently, an aggressive lymphoma may relapse as a small cell (indolent) lymphoma. Such a situation occurs with indolent lymphoma in the bone marrow and aggressive lymphoma in a nodal site. Patients may present in such a manner, and chemotherapy might successfully eradicate the peripheral disease while failing to eliminate the small cell component from the bone marrow. The clinical significance and natural history of this pattern of disease is not well defined.

Palliative radiation therapy

In general, patients with aggressive lymphoma who relapse with indolent histology will benefit from palliative therapy.[29] Palliation may be achieved with very low-dose (4 Gy) IF-XRT for patients with indolent and aggressive relapsed disease.[30]

SCT. The indolent lymphomas may relapse with an aggressive histology (i.e., histologic conversion). The durability of the second remission may be short, and clinical trials, such as autologous or allogeneic peripheral SCT, should be considered.[31-34]

Current Clinical Trials

Check for U.S. clinical trials from NCI's list of cancer clinical trials that are now accepting patients with
aggressive, recurrent adult non-Hodgkin lymphoma. The list of clinical trials can be further narrowed by location, drug, intervention, and other criteria.

General information about clinical trials is also available from the NCI Web site.

Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma During Pregnancy

General Information About NHL During Pregnancy

Non-Hodgkin lymphomas (NHLs) occur more frequently than Hodgkin lymphoma in an older population. This age difference may account for fewer reports of NHL in pregnant patients.[1]

Stage Information for NHL During Pregnancy

To avoid exposure to ionizing radiation, magnetic resonance imaging is the preferred tool for staging evaluation.[2] (Refer to the Stage Information for Adult NHL section of this summary for more information.)

Indolent NHL During Pregnancy

Treatment may be delayed for those women with an indolent NHL.

Aggressive NHL During Pregnancy

Immediate therapy

According to anecdotal case series, most NHLs in pregnant patients are aggressive, and delay of therapy until after delivery appears to have poor outcomes.[1,3-5] Consequently, some investigators favor immediate therapy, even during pregnancy.[5] In a review of 121 patient case reports from 74 papers, one-half of the patients had very aggressive lymphomas, such as Burkitt lymphoma, and one-half of the patients had involvement of the breast, ovaries, uterus, or placenta.[6] One-half of the patients received therapy antepartum, and the 6-month survival was reported at 53%, with a live-birth rate of 83%.[6][Level of evidence: 3iiiDiv]

Early delivery when feasible

For some women, early delivery, when feasible, may minimize or avoid exposure to chemotherapy or radiation therapy.

Termination of pregnancy

Termination of pregnancy in the first trimester may be an option that allows immediate therapy for women with aggressive NHL.

Evidence (treatment effect on children exposed in utero):

With follow-up ranging from several months to 11 years, children who were exposed to high-dose doxorubicin-containing combination chemotherapy in utero (especially during the second and third trimester) have been found to be normal.[5,7-9] For most of the chemotherapeutic agents used for the treatment of NHL, there are no data regarding long-term effects on children exposed in utero.

Added text to state that after induction therapy with rituximab only or with rituximab plus chemotherapy, rituximab can be used once every 2 to 3 months; several studies have evaluated this approach.

Revised text to state that in the PRIMA (NCT00140582) study, 1,019 high-risk, previously untreated, symptomatic patients achieved complete or partial response after induction therapy with immunochemotherapy and were then randomly assigned to 2 years of maintenance rituximab versus no maintenance.

Added text to state that in the UK/International study (NCT00112931), 379 previously untreated patients with asymptomatic, low-burden disease were randomly assigned to watchful waiting versus rituximab induction only versus rituximab induction followed by 2 years of rituximab maintenance (cited Ardeshna et al. as reference 66 and level of evidence 1iiC). Also added that overall survival (OS) and histologic transformation rates were no different at 3 years, but maintenance rituximab was favored based on quality-of-life studies and time-to-initiation of new treatment by 3 years.

Added text to state that this study suggested that for some patients, "watch and wait" resulted in "watch and worry" (cited Ansell as reference 67) and concluded that from the perspective of OS and histologic transformation rates, no benefit could be seen with rituximab maintenance.

Revised text to state that palliation may be achieved with very low-dose, involved-field radiation therapy in two fractions for patients with indolent and aggressive relapsed disease. Also added that in a prospective randomized trial, treatment with 4 Gy was inferior to treatment with 24 Gy in 12 fractions for progression-free survival (cited Hoskin et al. as reference 31 and level of evidence 1iiDiii).

Revised text to state that clinical trials continue to explore modifications of cyclophosphamide, hydroxydaunorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone (CHOP) and rituximab with CHOP (R-CHOP) by increasing doses, reducing intervals between cycles, combining new drugs with new mechanisms of action, or applying extra doses of rituximab (cited Pfreundschuh et al. as reference 15).

About This PDQ Summary

Purpose of This Summary

This PDQ cancer information summary for health professionals provides comprehensive, peer-reviewed, evidence-based information about the treatment of adult non-Hodgkin lymphoma. It is intended as a resource to inform and assist clinicians who care for cancer patients. It does not provide formal guidelines or recommendations for making health care decisions.

Reviewers and Updates

This summary is reviewed regularly and updated as necessary by the PDQ Adult Treatment Editorial Board, which is editorially independent of the National Cancer Institute (NCI). The summary reflects an independent review of the literature and does not represent a policy statement of NCI or the National Institutes of Health (NIH).

Board members review recently published articles each month to determine whether an article should:

be discussed at a meeting,

be cited with text, or

replace or update an existing article that is already cited.

Changes to the summaries are made through a consensus process in which Board members evaluate the strength of the evidence in the published articles and determine how the article should be included in the summary.

The lead reviewer for Adult Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma Treatment is:

Eric J. Seifter, MD (Johns Hopkins University)

Any comments or questions about the summary content should be submitted to Cancer.gov through the Web site's Contact Form. Do not contact the individual Board Members with questions or comments about the summaries. Board members will not respond to individual inquiries.

Levels of Evidence

Some of the reference citations in this summary are accompanied by a level-of-evidence designation. These designations are intended to help readers assess the strength of the evidence supporting the use of specific interventions or approaches. The PDQ Adult Treatment Editorial Board uses a formal evidence ranking system in developing its level-of-evidence designations.

Permission to Use This Summary

PDQ is a registered trademark. Although the content of PDQ documents can be used freely as text, it cannot be identified as an NCI PDQ cancer information summary unless it is presented in its entirety and is regularly updated. However, an author would be permitted to write a sentence such as “NCI’s PDQ cancer information summary about breast cancer prevention states the risks succinctly: [include excerpt from the summary].”

Images in this summary are used with permission of the author(s), artist, and/or publisher for use within the PDQ summaries only. Permission to use images outside the context of PDQ information must be obtained from the owner(s) and cannot be granted by the National Cancer Institute. Information about using the illustrations in this summary, along with many other cancer-related images, is available in Visuals Online, a collection of over 2,000 scientific images.

Disclaimer

Based on the strength of the available evidence, treatment options may be described as either “standard” or “under clinical evaluation.” These classifications should not be used as a basis for insurance reimbursement determinations. More information on insurance coverage is available on Cancer.gov on the Coping with Cancer: Financial, Insurance, and Legal Information page.

Contact Us

More information about contacting us or receiving help with the Cancer.gov Web site can be found on our Contact Us for Help page. Questions can also be submitted to Cancer.gov through the Web site’s Contact Form.

Get More Information From NCI

Call 1-800-4-CANCER

For more information, U.S. residents may call the National Cancer Institute's (NCI's) Cancer Information Service toll-free at 1-800-4-CANCER (1-800-422-6237) Monday through Friday from 8:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m., Eastern Time. A trained Cancer Information Specialist is available to answer your questions.

Chat online

The NCI's LiveHelp® online chat service provides Internet users with the ability to chat online with an Information Specialist. The service is available from 8:00 a.m. to 11:00 p.m. Eastern time, Monday through Friday. Information Specialists can help Internet users find information on NCI Web sites and answer questions about cancer.

Write to us

For more information from the NCI, please write to this address:

NCI Public Inquiries Office

9609 Medical Center Dr.

Room 2E532 MSC 9760

Bethesda, MD 20892-9760

Search the NCI Web site

The NCI Web site provides online access to information on cancer, clinical trials, and other Web sites and organizations that offer support and resources for cancer patients and their families. For a quick search, use the search box in the upper right corner of each Web page. The results for a wide range of search terms will include a list of "Best Bets," editorially chosen Web pages that are most closely related to the search term entered.

There are also many other places to get materials and information about cancer treatment and services. Hospitals in your area may have information about local and regional agencies that have information on finances, getting to and from treatment, receiving care at home, and dealing with problems related to cancer treatment.

Find Publications

The NCI has booklets and other materials for patients, health professionals, and the public. These publications discuss types of cancer, methods of cancer treatment, coping with cancer, and clinical trials. Some publications provide information on tests for cancer, cancer causes and prevention, cancer statistics, and NCI research activities. NCI materials on these and other topics may be ordered online or printed directly from the NCI Publications Locator. These materials can also be ordered by telephone from the Cancer Information Service toll-free at 1-800-4-CANCER (1-800-422-6237).

Updated: April
24, 2015

This text may be reproduced or reused freely. Please credit the National Cancer Institute as the source. Any graphics may be owned by the artist or publisher who created them, and permission may be needed for their reuse.